Oil Change International publishes upwards of 20 reports and briefings every year focused on supporting the movement for a just phase-out of fossil fuels.
In advance of this year's G7 Summit, 353 organizations from 58 countries have signed a letter calling on G7 leaders to stop financing fossil fuels; cancel debt payments in global South countries grappling with COVID-19 and climate impacts, and pay their fair share of climate finance to global South countries for climate adaptation among other demands.
This report analyzes fossil fuel financing from the world’s 60 largest commercial and investment banks — aggregating their leading roles in lending and underwriting of debt and equity issuances — and reveals that these banks poured a total of USD $3.8 trillion into fossil fuels from 2016–2020.
A new report, Banking on Climate Change 2020, reveals that 35 private-sector banks across Canada, China, Europe, Japan, and the U.S. have financed fossil fuels with USD $2.7 trillion since the Paris Agreement was adopted (2016-2019), with financing on the rise each year. The report finds that fossil fuel financing continues to be dominated by the big U.S. banks – JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citi, and Bank of America – together, these four banks account for a staggering 30% of all fossil fuel financing from the 35 major global banks since the Paris Agreement was adopted.
In January 2020, organizations, networks and community resistance groups from Africa and around the world deliberated on issues including fossil fuels dependence, climate change, energy access and the just transition. Following two days of discussions, they released the following communiqué.
The next president and Congress should reinstate the crude export ban in tandem with policies to ensure a just and equitable transition away from fossil fuels. A reimplementation of the ban would therefore require an ambitious and well-funded energy policy to prioritize justice and equity for workers and frontline and Indigenous communities in the necessary transition away from fossil fuels.
The latest climate science and rapidly changing energy markets indicate the need to rapidly shift away from fossil gas, yet the IEA mistakenly presents gas as compatible with a decarbonized future. This policy brief brings together the latest energy market research with the need for reform of the World Energy Outlook.
A new study released by Oil Change International examines the role of Danish oil and gas production in a Paris-aligned global carbon budget. The report confirms that while Denmark has positioned itself as a global climate leader, its plans to expand North Sea oil and fossil gas extraction would undermine its record of climate action and would be incompatible with achieving its Paris climate commitments.
G20 governments continue to provide billions of dollars for the production and consumption of fossil fuels. This report finds that they provide at least USD $63.9 billion per year in government support to the production and consumption of coal alone, with almost three-quarters of the support identified being directed to coal-fired power production.
There is no room for further financing of fossil gas or any other fossil fuel projects by the EIB. This briefing calls for the new Energy Lending Policy to reflect this reality. The EIB cannot claim to uphold its commitment to align its finance with the Paris Agreement if it continues to finance fossil gas projects.
To help inform the alignment of the MDBs with the Paris Agreement, this briefing explores the use of shadow carbon pricing by MDBs and considers some best practices and limitations in the application of shadow carbon prices.
